It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Does the bible condemn homosexuality?

page: 6
2
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 17 2008 @ 01:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by Conspiriology
 


Conspiriology nice to see you again


Can you please try and be nice and civil and um...not so offensive sounding? Lets not Sally Kerns this one too, alright? Try and present yourself in such a manner that homosexuals, and others, would actually want to debate and discuss with you.

Your normal "homosexuals are disgusting vile creatures that fornicate with dogs and dead people" just isn't conducive for civil discussion.



Knock it off lunacy, the mere image this topic conjures up is likely to make any Christian sick and is one only a Christian would be and should be offended by meaning I'd trade your feelings for mine any day when it comes to this.

secondly, the argument for using other creatures for sex is used in the same way the the OP uses it to justify his own brand of immorality.

You know what amazes me lunacy is that YOU attend all these kinds of threads which make Christians sitting ducks for your many alerts for your transparent sensitivities being offended while we must coddle and placate you with sugary sweetness. If you want to talk about sexual immorality while maintining some sanctimonious halo in the same breath you support sheering the Bible to shreds? Oh that's clever but I ain't buying it. Ill tone it down but Ill be watching you and your setup the fundie trap the whole time.

This is what I have seen you do on so many occasions and knowing you have heard this argument beaten to death in the ground

I would think you'd have a little

thicker skin by now.

- Con




posted on May, 17 2008 @ 01:52 AM
link   
reply to post by scorand
 


sorry if i came across as a little antagonistic



posted on May, 17 2008 @ 01:55 AM
link   
reply to post by scorand
 


Thank you, I appreciate it. Yes I am probably just as well read as most of the Bible thumpers on ATS, although I am not a church-going orthodox Christian. This is probably why they don't like me
I am in the process of learning to read biblical Hebrew, Aramaic and Koine Greek as well. Although it's been relatively slow progress.

I love discussion and debate, and religion and spirituality are my favorite topics... so by all means, if you want to ask me something I will offer what I can



posted on May, 17 2008 @ 01:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by ravenflt

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
Whether you like it or not, homosexuality isn't mentioned in the bible as being a moral sin. Sex between men in a ritual sense, concerning certain Ba'al practices in the ME, is.

[edit on 15/5/2008 by Neo Christian Mystic]


LOL, that doesnt make sense. That would also mean that having sex with animals, adultery and incest is not a corruption as long as it's not performed during a Baal ritual...

You sure you read chapter 20?


No it doesn't. Read the words in Hebrew and understand that the incest laws etc. use words dealing with moral aspects, while the "homophilia law" use a word connecting the sin not to immorality, but sins towards the ceremonial or ritual agenda of Moses/God.



posted on May, 17 2008 @ 02:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Conspiriology
 


I assure you Conspiriology, the only knee-jerk reaction I had was a hearty laugh. My skin is fine. My heart-rate harmonious. My sensitivities intact. No, you have not affected me in that way. I am impervious to your hate and disdain. Sorry. But if you want to actually discuss with me, i'd love it.

I was making suggestions for you, because I know your posting history


As for me and my alleged trapping Christians with my sugary words (or as our friend called me, a Silver-Tongued Devil).... Let's let it evolve and let is speak for itself.

[edit on 023131p://17u26 by Lucid Lunacy]



posted on May, 17 2008 @ 02:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Conspiriology
 


not really i know many christians who have no problem with gays.. a lot dont understand it. but i also know many who r accepted by their church.. and yes its a real christian church.. pentacostal,and presbiterian,, all the old wives tales about homosexuality r being gone over by biblical scholars and churches and they r finding that just being gay isnt a sin.. while its still hotly debated.. the truth will out..



posted on May, 17 2008 @ 02:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alcove

Originally posted by zysin5
While we are at it and talking about Exodus. Many of the preists leave out what they dont want you to hear.

Did you know its aginst Gods will to wear clothes woven of 2 different types of cloth?

Did you know its aginst Gods will to Work more than 6 days a week.
Eating on sunday after church is punishable by death



That's a common misconception about the Bible. Those are laws given in the Old Testament to the ancient Jewish people. They are no longer valid today, after Jesus's crucifixion. Hebrews 8:7 - 10:18 explains this in depth.


I'm afraid it's you who have been duped. Should we listen to Paul or Jesus? I would say Jesus would have more of a say in the matters concerning Jesus, and he says in Matthew 5 that:

17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Feel free to believe what you say is true, but then your rightiousness doesn't surpass that of the Pharicees and you will be cut off. Jesus says so. Paul was a Pharicee who worked against the forming of the Christians. He made sure they would stay out of the synagogues by abolishing circumcission and the Law in general, and he even taught the Christians celibacy so that they would be cut off within a generation. Make up your mind. Are you a follower of Christ or Paul?



posted on May, 17 2008 @ 02:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 


thank u lucid.. my dad was really good for throwing scripture around.. usually at bible thumpers trying to to shove dogma around like they were the last word on the bible..lol u would have loved him



posted on May, 17 2008 @ 02:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 


oh and good luck with the hebrew and greek.. i see i need to brush up on my skills with just the english version.. but i still think this is a great thread



posted on May, 17 2008 @ 02:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy



Your normal "homosexuals are disgusting vile creatures that fornicate with dogs and dead people" just isn't conducive for civil discussion.


Oh this is desperate, even for you lunacy, and is why you have no credibility about what you think you understand. Please share with me my quote about homsexuals being vile creatures having sex with dead people is not homsexual sex lunacy,, that is necrophilia and yes that is right up their with any other sex which is immoral according to scripture.

Thanks so much for conjuring up the image for me jeez.

I just want to say to pause for thought, the efforts you put forth albeit noble and true, you don't understand atheists and gay atheists or their tactics yet. See P4t, this is what they do, this is the point of the thread.

It isn't about being right or correcting a sinner, these are children of the grave who have bartered their souls for sex. It's the same members from Major malfunctions forum and this is what they do.

Then the same thread again and rile em up and alert em down as they fake having these self concepts one molecule away from being an eggshell Oh and trust me, they have NO, I mean NONE, NOTTA not one Iota, no not any intention of listening to a word you say and will just drag you into another debate while another praises them in a team effort employed to get your ire.

A series of posts using this tactic and those being identified on another website who are members here are already known about by ATS and those members know who they are .

So do I.

Its called Bait and Alert and it is their strategy to get Christians out of here. Ill u2u the details and show you what I mean.

As for lunacy and the peanut gallery,,

Sorry to spill the beans

well,, not really

- Con







[edit on 17-5-2008 by Conspiriology]



posted on May, 17 2008 @ 02:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic
 


sorry

that is not correct

YET AGAIN a verse is taken out of context. read the whole chapter it is clear that it is talking about general sexual behaviour.

6 None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness: I am the LORD.

7 The nakedness of thy father, or the nakedness of thy mother, shalt thou not uncover: she is thy mother; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.

8 The nakedness of thy father's wife shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father's nakedness.

9 The nakedness of thy sister, the daughter of thy father, or daughter of thy mother, whether she be born at home, or born abroad, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover.

10 The nakedness of thy son's daughter, or of thy daughter's daughter, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover: for theirs is thine own nakedness.

11 The nakedness of thy father's wife's daughter, begotten of thy father, she is thy sister, thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.

12 Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father's sister: she is thy father's near kinswoman.

13 Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy mother's sister: for she is thy mother's near kinswoman.

14 Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father's brother, thou shalt not approach to his wife: she is thine aunt.

15 Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy daughter-in-law: she is thy son's wife; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.

16 Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy brother's wife: it is thy brother's nakedness.

17 Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter, neither shalt thou take her son's daughter, or her daughter's daughter, to uncover her nakedness; for they are her near kinswomen: it is wickedness.

18 Neither shalt thou take a wife to her sister, to vex her, to uncover her nakedness, besides the other in her life time.

19 Also thou shalt not approach unto a woman to uncover her nakedness, as long as she is put apart for her uncleanness.

20 Moreover thou shalt not lie carnally with thy neighbor's wife, to defile thyself with her.

21 And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD.

22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion.

Strongs translation for verse 22

a disgusting thing, abomination, abominable

in ritual sense (of unclean food, idols, mixed marriages)

in ethical sense (of wickedness etc)

i beleive you gave or recieved misinformation





This verse speeks of similar acts as Leviticus, but here Paul explicitly talk about married Christian men in Rome leaving their women (wives) to commit adulterous acts with people of the same sex. Not homosexuality, but adultary.



what??? seriously??????????

Romans 1:26-27

for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.

marriage? rubbish! this is talking about men and women in general society.

what next? A talmud defense posting??????
















































[edit on 17/5/2008 by drevill]



posted on May, 17 2008 @ 02:12 AM
link   
reply to post by drevill
 


Drevill if you don't mind can you

Share your personal thoughts and feelings on how you interpret those passages, instead of just posting them.

Also, it really helps if you note which translation each are from...



posted on May, 17 2008 @ 02:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic
 


I have not read all of your comments, but i suspect you did not mention what the apostle Paul wrote in Romans (new testament) where he mentions "they burned in lust for each other...." The message is clear, you should read it with an open mind that you claim to have (i assume).


I have commented this in my OP actually. It's about Christian husbonds and wives leaving their spouses to commit radical adultary. When you read the bible you must read the whole context, not just snippets from different verses.



posted on May, 17 2008 @ 02:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Conspiriology
Oh this is desperate, even for you lunacy, and is why you have no credibility about what you think you understand. Please share with me my quote about homsexuals being vile creatures having sex with dead people is not homsexual sex lunacy,, that is necrophilia and yes that is right up their with any other sex which is immoral according to scripture.


I would love to paste more then one post of yours from other threads where you have said exactly that! Any Mods listening in on this? Can I get a go ahead for doing that?

Now, if you study what you just said in an objective light, you will see that you are equating the immoral severity of screwing dead people and animals with homosexuality. That is why many members don't find what you say credible.

For one I would, of course, argue there is nothing immoral about homosexuality at all.

But even people that don't agree with me don't normally take it to the extent that you do.

From many posts from other threads you have said, even more clearly then you just did, that homosexuality is equivalent to having sex with dead people and animals. You said God views homosexuality as bad and immoral as those.



posted on May, 17 2008 @ 02:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by pause4thought
reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic
 



Sex before marriage is not mentioned anywhere in the bible's 613 laws.


This is simply a false statement. It is mentioned very clearly, and it could carry the death penalty. In this post on another thread I discussed this issue, and the issue of how the moral law still stands in its entirety:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The O.T. passage is Deuteronomy 22:13-21


Deuteronomy 22 doesn't mention marriage as we practice it today. If you read the text you will see that marriage is defined by the sexual act. Two persons marry in the instance they have sex, like I say, but they cannot leave eachother unless adultary has been uncovered. However, a man could marry many times and like Solomon have 300 wives and 700 concubines, but if a woman was caught with another man she would be killed. Read don't just quote.



posted on May, 17 2008 @ 02:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Conspiriology
 


well i for one have never heard of this other site u'r talking about..



posted on May, 17 2008 @ 02:20 AM
link   
Hello There




God created sexuality and our genes. 10% of us are genetically gay. You find the same pattern more or less everywhere in the animal kingdom. God doesn't condemn gays, he loves them. Statistically one of the twelve sons of Israel would be gay. Wonder who it was...


Nice statistic, where is the proof of this? you will not be be able to prove it because it is pure conjecture. There is NO proof that it is genetic.

all the best

david



posted on May, 17 2008 @ 02:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Conspiriology
 


I love how I read your posts and remember what you say, but you never return that show of respect and open-mindedness.

I have said time and again in threads you participate in (or do you?)...


you don't understand atheists and gay atheists


That I am not an atheist, and that I do believe in God.

I am also bisexual. I don't care what you call me. I don't expect respect



posted on May, 17 2008 @ 02:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy




From many posts from other threads you have said, even more clearly then you just did, that homosexuality is equivalent to having sex with dead people and animals. You said God views homosexuality as bad and immoral as those.



There you go again lunacy ,, that is not the question I asked, I know the difference between them and I know what the are I asked you to show me where I said homosexuals are having sex with dead people as YOU brought it up. The fact that I say they are the same when it comes to judgement. It only takes ONE sin to go to perish lunacy, just one and it doesn'nt matter WHICH one it is for the wages of sin is death.

Now if you want to act like you are offended by these kinds of topics while you are busy gettng your team to hit the alerts and various other snitches and tattle tale sophistry, than be my guest.

I got something

for that

too



posted on May, 17 2008 @ 02:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by drevill
reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic
 


sorry

that is not correct

YET AGAIN a verse is taken out of context. read the whole chapter it is clear that it is talking about general sexual behaviour.


Nope, it speeks of various sexual acts, some dealing with immorality (incest etc) and violation of ceremonial practice (men having sex with men).

You must realise that the Torah is a Hebrew book, not an English one or anything else. English lacks certain words used in the Torah, for instance there is no English word for "to'ebah" which means literally ceremonially unclean. However this word is translated into "Abomination" or "Destestable thing" etc. Greek has this word, and in the Septuagint they translate "to'ebah" with "bdelygma" which has the exact same meaning. That's what context is all about my friend. Remember that the Torah is a translated book, and often poorly so, to substanciate the politics of Europe and the Church.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join